2017
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0643-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contacting of authors by systematic reviewers: protocol for a cross-sectional study and a survey

Abstract: BackgroundSynthesizing outcomes of underreported primary studies can pose a serious threat to the validity of outcomes and conclusions of systematic reviews. To address this problem, the Cochrane Collaboration recommends reviewers to contact authors of eligible primary studies to obtain additional information on poorly reported items. In this protocol, we present a cross-sectional study and a survey to assess (1) how reviewers of new Cochrane intervention reviews report on procedures and outcomes of contacting… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If data were not specifically reported for patellofemoral OCA in studies that otherwise met inclusion criteria, authors were contacted to provide missing data points. 23…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If data were not specifically reported for patellofemoral OCA in studies that otherwise met inclusion criteria, authors were contacted to provide missing data points. 23…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If there is a lack of access to the full text of some studies or if there is any unclear information, the researchers will contact the corresponding author thrice during a period of 7 to 14 days [55,56]. We will report all the missing data if we cannot find them.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We will deal with missing data using 2 strategies. In case of missing the full text of studies from the review, or if there is any unclear information, the researchers will contact the corresponding author(s) thrice during a period of 7 to 14 days [55,56]. When outcome data are not reported, we will calculate the outcome data if there is additional information in the publications [59,60].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If information was not provided online, we attempted to contact each program through a standardized email to increase the rigor of our study, as has been done in other studies. [34][35][36] We repeated this email strategy once a week for 3 weeks. Residency programs were excluded if a list of residents could not be located, if the list was incomplete for our selected years, or if the list of residency placements was not published by year.…”
Section: Department and Residency Graduate Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%